Scottish Executive

Agriculture

John Scott (Ayr) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive when the Over Thirty Month Scheme for cattle will be reinstated.

Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive when the Over Thirty Month Scheme for cattle will restart.

Ross Finnie: I have asked the Intervention Board to reinstate the Over Thirty Month Scheme (OTMS) in Scotland by mid-July. Operational details are now being worked on by the Intervention Board which operates this scheme and the Meat Hygiene Service which has to provide the necessary hygiene staff for the plants.

Careleavers

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-14208 by Mr Jack McConnell on 29 May 2001, when a report on its consultation on the proposed transfer of DSS resources to local authorities for young people leaving care will be published.

Nicol Stephen: In response to question S1W-2680, Mr Sam Galbraith announced the results of the consultation, which showed a majority support for the principle of a general fund. He also announced the setting up of an implementation group, comprising representatives from key stakeholders, to consider the implications of the transfer of resources for improved aftercare.

  I expect the group to report its recommendations in the autumn. We will then consult on detailed proposals.

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-14208 by Mr Jack McConnell on 29 May 2001, when a report on its consultation on the regulation of early education and child care will be published.

Nicol Stephen: The Regulation of Early Education and Childcare – The Way Ahead , published in May 2000, set out our conclusions following consultation in March 1999. During the course of the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Bill, we further amended our policy proposals to ensure full regulation covered children up to 16 and child care agencies, and to provide for fully integrated inspection of care services which include an educational element. The Bill awaits Royal Assent.

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-14208 by Mr Jack McConnell on 29 May 2001, when a report on its consultation on national priorities for schools education in Scotland will be published.

Mr Jack McConnell: The report summarising responses to the consultation on national priorities for school education was sent to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee of the Scottish Parliament in December 2000. I have now instructed that it be placed in the Parliament’s reference centre (Bib. no. 14481).

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-14208 by Mr Jack McConnell on 29 May 2001, when a report on its consultation on the Schools Scotland Code 1956 will be published.

Mr Jack McConnell: 67 detailed responses on the future of the Code’s provisions were received. Consideration was delayed to allow negotiation and implementation of the McCrone Report’s recommendations, which had implications for areas of the Code such as grades of posts in schools.

  I intend to consider the outcome of the consultation exercise on the future of the 1956 Code in the coming weeks, with a view to making a decision by early autumn.

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-14208 by Mr Jack McConnell on 29 May 2001, when a report on its review of devolved school management will be published.

Mr Jack McConnell: The DSM Review Group expects to publish its report in late August.

Employment

Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what measures have been put in place to enable production engineers being made redundant from the Motorola plant in Bathgate to move into the field of micro-electronic design and to participate in Project Alba.

Ms Wendy Alexander: Support from the Scottish Executive will continue to facilitate the provision of high quality training programmes for those individuals wishing to develop their skills. It is a priority of the Motorola Taskforce to ensure that all Motorola workers have access to appropriate training, where this is identified as being the best means of equipping them for future employment. The taskforce is willing to consider any reasonable proposals for retraining from those workers affected by the closure.

  Training opportunities through ISLI (the Institute for System Level Integration) have been mooted as a potential means of providing enhanced level training to those who require it to enable access to the higher value end of the electronic sector. Scottish Enterprise Edinburgh and Lothian are working closely with ISLI and the Alba Centre to establish a viable proposal which fits with the needs of the Motorola employees.

Enterprise

Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what percentage of the Scottish Enterprise national clusters budget was allocated to each local enterprise company in the latest year for which figures are available.

Ms Wendy Alexander: This is an operational matter for Scottish Enterprise and I have asked the Chairman to respond direct to the member. A copy of the reply will be placed in the Parliament’s reference centre.

Enterprise

Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what the cost was of each job (a) created and (b) safeguarded by (i) Scottish Enterprise and (ii) Highlands and Islands Enterprise in each of the last three years, broken down by local enterprise company area.

Ms Wendy Alexander: This is an operational matter for Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise and I have asked their respective Chairmen to reply to the member. Copies of their replies will be placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe).

First Minister

Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what internal advice and other confidential documents it makes available to the First Minister’s parliamentary private secretary.

Henry McLeish: Official information made available to my parliamentary private secretary is limited to what is necessary for the discharge of her parliamentary and political duties.

Foot-and-Mouth Disease

Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-16175 by Angus MacKay on 20 June 2001, when and how the information on numbers of hardship relief claims by businesses affected by the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak will be made available.

Angus MacKay: The table below shows the number of cases of hardship relief that had been granted by each council as at 21 June 2001, and the number that were still under consideration at that date. Data on unsuccessful claims are not held centrally.

  Applications for relief are still being received by councils, and some businesses may still be collecting evidence to support their claims, so the figures below are likely to rise as further applications are processed.

  


Council 
  

Hardship relief claims granted 
  

Hardship relief claims under consideration 
  



Aberdeen City 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Aberdeenshire 
  

0 
  

26 
  



Angus 
  

10 
  

15 
  



Argyll & Bute 
  

0 
  

215 
  



Clackmannanshire 
  

0 
  

1 
  



Dumfries & Galloway 
  

501 
  

0 
  



Dundee City 
  

0 
  

3 
  



East Ayrshire 
  

0 
  

8 
  



East Dunbartonshire 
  

0 
  

3 
  



East Lothian 
  

0 
  

4 
  



East Renfrewshire 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Edinburgh 
  

0 
  

24 
  



Eilean Siar 
  

7 
  

0 
  



Falkirk 
  

0 
  

1 
  



Fife 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Glasgow 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Highland 
  

44 
  

92 
  



Inverclyde 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Midlothian 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Moray 
  

0 
  

0 
  



North Ayrshire 
  

0 
  

16 
  



North Lanarkshire 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Orkney Islands 
  

2 
  

2 
  



Perth & Kinross 
  

9 
  

2 
  



Renfrewshire 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Scottish Borders 
  

328 
  

372 
  



Shetland Islands 
  

0 
  

0 
  



South Ayrshire 
  

0 
  

11 
  



South Lanarkshire 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Stirling 
  

0 
  

25 
  



West Dunbartonshire 
  

0 
  

0 
  



West Lothian 
  

0 
  

3 
  



Scotland 
  

901 
  

823

Foot-and-Mouth Disease

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1O-3599 by Ross Finnie on 21 June 2001, whether it will give an undertaking that no measures relating to the proposal to introduce a 20-day standstill period following movements of livestock will be implemented prior to their consideration by the Parliament.

Ross Finnie: No decisions have yet been taken on the 20-day standstill proposal. Any new requirements that may arise from the proposal or alternative suggestions will require legislative backing before introduction and, as mentioned in the consultation paper, a further consultation will be undertaken on the draft legislation. Any new legislation will be subject to scrutiny in the normal way before coming into force.

Foot-and-Mouth Disease

Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many submissions were received on the proposal to introduce a 20-day standstill period following movements of livestock and how many submissions were in favour of the proposal being implemented.

Ross Finnie: Over 150 replies have been received and are being carefully considered. The vast majority of responses stress that the introduction of a straight 20-day standstill period is unworkable. Equally, however, many recognise that the status quo is untenable and offer alternative proposals. These are being actively considered in terms of effectiveness, enforceability and impact on industry.

Parliamentary Questions

Irene Oldfather (Cunninghame South) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive when it will answer questions S1W-14468 and S1W-14469 lodged on 23 March 2001.

Susan Deacon: These questions have now been answered.

Police

Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many and what percentage of the total number of requests for police assistance were (a) made to and (b) responded to by each police force in each of the last three years.

Mr Jim Wallace: This information is not held centrally.

Road Safety

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-8650 by Sarah Boyack on 14 August 2000, how many personal injury accidents occurred on the A85 between Lochearnhead and Crianlarich in each year from 1990 to 1994.

Sarah Boyack: Details of the personal injury accidents which have occurred on the A85 between Lochearnhead and Crianlarich for each year from 1990 to 1994 is as follows:

  


A85 between Lochearnhead and Crianlarich: Injury Accidents 
  (1990-94) 
  



Year 
  

Fatal 
  

Serious 
  

Slight 
  

Total 
  



1990 
  

0 
  

4 
  

4 
  

8 
  



1991 
  

0 
  

2 
  

4 
  

6 
  



1992 
  

0 
  

5 
  

4 
  

9 
  



1993 
  

0 
  

1 
  

3 
  

4 
  



1994 
  

0 
  

3 
  

6 
  

9 
  



Total 
  

0 
  

15 
  

21 
  

36

Road Safety

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-14189 by Sarah Boyack on 28 March 2001, what types of schemes to improve road safety on the A85 between Lochearnhead and Crianlarich it will be discussing with the new operating company with responsibility for this stretch of road and when any such discussions will take place.

Sarah Boyack: The Scottish Executive convened a meeting on 5 June 2001 with BEAR Scotland Ltd and the Balquhidder Community Council to discuss progress on various matters relating to improvement works on the A85 at Lochearnhead. These include:

  - alterations to the A84/A85 junction;

  - provision of a footway;

  - provision of street lighting;

  - village gateway signing.

  It is anticipated that these schemes will be implemented this financial year, subject to agreements being reached on land acquisition. Balquhidder Community Council will be consulted further as details of these proposals are developed.

  A separate meeting between the Scottish Executive and BEAR Scotland Ltd was also convened on 5 June 2001 to discuss the implementation of the recommendations outlined in a Safety Audit Report for the cycle crossing at Glen Ogle.

  A further meeting has been arranged for 12 July 2001 between the Scottish Executive and BEAR Scotland Ltd to review the results of the preliminary study that has been completed to identify possible improvements on the A85 trunk road between Lochearnhead and Lix Toll.

Roads

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether BEAR Scotland Ltd are statutory consultees in respect of planning applications which affect access on to trunk roads which they are responsible for maintaining and whether, if they lodge an objection to such an application, this automatically results in the application being called in.

Sarah Boyack: The Scottish Executive is a statutory consultee in respect of planning applications that affect trunk roads. BEAR Scotland Ltd provide the Scottish Executive with an assessment and recommendation on planning applications submitted by planning authorities in the North of Scotland. Any recommendation by BEAR Scotland Ltd to refuse an application is assessed by the Scottish Executive before a decision is recommended to the planning authority. If the planning authority ignores the Scottish Executive’s recommendation, a decision is taken on whether the planning application should be called in.

Roads

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many objections Mouchel Scotland Ltd submitted during 2000 in respect of planning applications affecting access onto trunk roads which they were responsible for maintaining and in how many of these cases planning permission was (a) granted and (b) refused.

Sarah Boyack: During 2000, Mouchel Scotland Ltd assessed 72 planning applications on behalf of the Scottish Executive. The Scottish Executive considered the information provided by Mouchel and recommended that 18 applications be refused.

  The responsibility for making final determinations on planning applications lies with the planning authorities and their decisions on these planning applications are not readily available to the Scottish Executive.

Scottish Criminal Records Office

Irene Oldfather (Cunninghame South) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, in light of the terms of HM Inspectorate of Constabulary’s Primary Inspection into the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO), whether the Lord Advocate has any plans to consider ending the requirement to have all fingerprint identifications made by SCRO officers independently checked.

Colin Boyd QC: The Lord Advocate has instructed Procurators Fiscal that the independent verification of SCRO fingerprint identifications is no longer required in light of the changes and improvements made to SCRO procedures.

  Since independent verification was introduced last year, over 1,700 cases have been examined and in each instance, the quality and accuracy of the work of SCRO officers has been confirmed. I am not aware of any successful challenge to fingerprint evidence in Scotland over the past year and it remains open to the defence in each case to secure their own expert to independently check any fingerprint evidence to be adduced by the Crown.

Scottish Executive Publications

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what the full costs were of launching, publishing and distributing its Greater Protection for Hutters consultation document.

Mr Jim Wallace: The cost of designing, printing, copying and distributing copies of the consultation paper was in the region of £1,500.

Scottish Executive Publications

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive which organisations and individuals were sent the Greater Protection for Hutters consultation document.

Mr Jim Wallace: Copies of the consultation paper were sent to all parties who had made representations on the subject of hutters in response to the first Land Reform Policy Group consultation. This included a number of landlords whose estates included hut sites (including the Carbeth Estate) and a number of individual hutters, as well as the Carbeth Hutters’ Association. In addition, the paper was sent to all MSPs who had displayed an interest in the subject and all local authorities in Scotland. A number of other organisations including the National Farmers’ Union, Scottish National Heritage and the Forestry Commission were sent copies of the report. Certain individuals requested multiple copies of the report for distribution to their associates. Such requests were met when made.

Teacher Training

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-14208 by Mr Jack McConnell on 29 May 2001, when a report on its collaborative review of initial teacher education will be published.

Mr Jack McConnell: The answer to question S1W-15074 described the Collaborative Review of Initial Teacher Education as a departmental consultation exercise. May I take this opportunity to correct that statement. The consultation should have been listed as "Collaborative Review of Initial Teacher Education." The inclusion of the word "department" was a typographical error and I offer my apologies for any confusion this has caused.

  The new process of collaborative review is aimed at enhancing quality assurance arrangements in Initial Teacher Education in Scotland. The process will evaluate against the Standard for Initial Teacher Education issued on 26 February 2001. This document was included as an annex in the handbook produced by the Standing Committee on Quality Assurance in Initial Teacher Education.

  The Standing Committee issued the handbook for comment to all local education authorities, teacher education institutions and other key educational stakeholders on 26 February 2001 for comment by 6 April.

  A total of 26 organisations responded. These comments will be incorporated along with the outcomes of a Pilot Review (September 2001-April 2002) leading to a revised version of the handbook being produced in time for the Review Cycle beginning in September 2002.

Transport

Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive how much of the £5.2 million announced in May 2000 for safer routes to school schemes was allocated to each local authority and how many projects were created in each local authority area.

Sarah Boyack: Allocations and number of projects created are given in the following table.

  


Local Authority 
  

Allocation for Safer
Routes to School
(£000) 
  

Number of Projects 
  



Aberdeen City 
  

200 
  

8 
  



Aberdeenshire 
  

205 
  

7 
  



Angus 
  

109 
  

10 
  



Argyll & Bute 
  

109 
  

14 
  



Borders 
  

108 
  

15 
  



City of Edinburgh 
  

467 
  

37 
  



City of Glasgow 
  

674 
  

12 
  



Clackmannanshire 
  

48 
  

7 
  



Dumfries & Galloway 
  

140 
  

6 
  



Dundee City 
  

145 
  

7 
  



East Ayrshire 
  

120 
  

12 
  



East Dunbartonshire 
  

114 
  

11 
  



East Lothian 
  

89 
  

5 
  



East Renfrewshire 
  

89 
  

2 
  



Falkirk 
  

142 
  

6 
  



Fife 
  

345 
  

38 
  



Highland 
  

215 
  

26 
  



Inverclyde 
  

93 
  

1 
  



Midlothian 
  

84 
  

5 
  



Moray 
  

85 
  

7 
  



North Ayrshire 
  

150 
  

3 
  



North Lanarkshire 
  

334 
  

7 
  



Perthshire & Kinross 
  

132 
  

7 
  



Renfrewshire 
  

185 
  

43 
  



South Ayrshire 
  

113 
  

15 
  



South Lanarkshire 
  

309 
  

12 
  



Stirling 
  

86 
  

7 
  



West Dunbartonshire 
  

98 
  

5 
  



West Lothian 
  

151 
  

1 
  



Western Isles 
  

37 
  

3 
  



Shetland Islands 
  

0 
  

0 
  



Orkney Islands 
  

25 
  

3 
  



Total 
  

5,200 
  

342

Water Authorities

Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how much (a) it and (b) each water authority spent on services provided by Water Research Centre Ltd in Medmenham in each of the last three years.

Ross Finnie: The figures are given in the following table:

  

 

1998-99 
  

1999-2000 
  

2000-01 
  



North of Scotland Water Authority 
  

£173,979.62 
  

£53,137.65 
  

£131,608.06 
  



East of Scotland Water Authority 
  

£215,846.92 
  

£111,540.20 
  

£94,763.37 
  



West of Scotland Water Authority 
  

£349,782.00 
  

£36,344.00 
  

£87,015.00 
  



The Scottish Executive 
  

N/A 
  

N/A 
  

£8,225.00

Water Authorities

Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether water authorities would have greater commercial freedom if they were exempted from the Competition Act 1998.

Ross Finnie: Exemptions from the provisions of the Competition Act 1998 are relevant only in the case of the Act’s Chapter I prohibition against agreements between undertakings which have the object or effect of preventing, restricting or distorting competition in the United Kingdom. Such exemptions, which do not apply to undertakings, can only be established in the courts on a case-by-case basis by proving that an agreement that could be caught by the prohibition assists economic progress and technical development. There is no reason to believe that establishing exemptions in the case of particular agreements between a water authority and another undertaking would affect the commercial freedom of that authority.